Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz
Yeah, you lost me when you said you would buy a HQ.
Without doubt the worst rear suspension in the history of Australian Motoring.
I could never get my head under to actually have a look (because they were always dragging on the ground) but I suspect that ex-factory they used some form of marshmallow
Now, a HG 350 Monaro. Aside from the rust, that's something I could live with.
|
Look at the HQ racing with the big 202 they handle well, it's all about knowing what is best to do with a car, the test back in the days were by idiots, they could of given out information on how to change a bucket of s--- into a much better car, all you need is a few tips to change and one would be astounded by the difference such can make.
I was thinking back to the days, just how good were them cars ? that's why I put this up.
One has a perception of what they like in a car and so what is that ?
My father in law says that fast cars never were of interest to him at all and he has different standards that he goes by and complains about test drivers pushing a car to limits, he thinks such is just rubbish, but I say if you do a test you do it thoroughly no stone is unturned with me but I can respect others opinions that such is their cup of tea.
One clown I know claimed that the Datsun 260 C ect was so much better than the Aussie cars and why he claims such but to me such things I would never bother with at all but I think that such people get mixed up with a 260 C and a 173 Belmont, when in fact the price of such is in the class of a V8 GTS or a GT
so no the Aussie cars wipe the floor with such rubbish truly and yes the 260C may flog a 173 or 200 falcon but so what.